I think you're exactly right. That's a positive. We are getting infrastructure in the north, courtesy of the private sector, where they see a return on investment in mineral extraction that requires them to develop transportation infrastructure that can be used for the public as well as the private. That gets into some problems sometimes because there are issues about access. First nations are concerned about increased access to areas that didn't have public access before. The fact of the matter is, we are getting privately financed northern infrastructure that we otherwise could not afford.
How do we coordinate that? Every territory has a permitting process for resource developments and in those there are impact and benefit agreements. That's the first avenue to take a look, at least at where there are some legacy opportunities from resource development infrastructure for the rest of the public. I'm not convinced this gets the right review in that whole permitting process. It's usually in terms of how we actually remove all this infrastructure so it's never there after the mine is done. Sometimes that can backfire on us a bit. For example, the Nanisivik mine is now our only deepwater port in the north. If that had been removed in accordance with the original permitting procedures or requirements, it wouldn't be there.